An accused sentenced to six years rigorous imprisonment by Additional Magistrate Kandy was released by Kandy High Court Judge Justice Amendra Seneviratne after a revision application was filed by the mother of the accused. Attorney’s Maneesha Seneviratne, Aftab Jameel on the instructions of Attorney at Law Sunanda Udulagama appeared for the accused. Defence attorneys claimed the [...]

News

Additional Magistrate’s ruling declared null and void

View(s):

An accused sentenced to six years rigorous imprisonment by Additional Magistrate Kandy was released by Kandy High Court Judge Justice Amendra Seneviratne after a revision application was filed by the mother of the accused. Attorney’s Maneesha Seneviratne, Aftab Jameel on the instructions of Attorney at Law Sunanda Udulagama appeared for the accused. Defence attorneys claimed the order made by the Kandy Additional Magistrate was bad in law.

In this case Liyanarachige Saman Rupasinghe of 32 Mile Post of Galkumbura Bibile, stood accused of defrauding a number of persons of Rs. 258,000 each, on a promise of obtaining them employment.  The findings of the High Court Judge revealed that when the cases came up before the Kandy Additional Magistrate on a ‘ B’ report, the accused agreed to pay the said sum. Thereafter he had asked for time on two occasions. On the third date he had informed Court he was unable to make payment.

The Additional Magistrate had then sentenced the accused to six years rigorous imprisonment, though a charge sheet had not been presented or charges being made. The accused then served jail terms at several prisons, when a petition was filed by his mother – Tennakoon Mudiyanselage Sopinona- for a revision of sentence.

In his ruling the Kandy High Court Judge said charging a person does not necessarily mean he is guilty. Until the charge is proved, the accused is not guilty. The Judge said there was no record that the accused had pleaded guilty to a charge. He added that therefore there was no provision to order a penal sentence on the accused.

Judge Seneviratne observed the accused had served a sentence for three years and had also been in remand custody. Under these circumstances he said ordering retrial was unfair. He said he accepted the petition and he grants redress as asked by defence attorney, discharged the accused and set aside the Additional Magistrate’s order




Share This Post

DeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspace
comments powered by Disqus

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.